1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 17 February 2016 b. Date Received: 14 March 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, she was sexually assaulted by a Command Sergeant Major (CSM) while deployed to Iraq, which led to a downward spiral. The applicant was shocked that she assaulted her and she paid for it. She used an illegal substance to cope with the trauma. The applicant contends that she did not receive any counseling, which has caused a negative impact in her life. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had no mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for the offenses. Mental Status Exam from June 2011 included a diagnosis of Anxiety Disorder NOS. She met medical retention standards and was psychiatrically cleared. Screened negative for PTSD and TBI. Medical records indicated treatment for depression and anxiety in 2010-2011 for stress related to marriage and being assaulted by Command Sergeant Major. CID report had no files regarding MST. No diagnosis of PTSD. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 7 September 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 29 September 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 22 August 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant wrongfully used marijuana (between on or about 8 December 2010 and 6 January 2011). (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: Declined, 23 August 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 20 September 2011 / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 5 July 2007 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 25 / GED / 90 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-4 / 42A10, Human Resources Specialist / 4 years, 2 months, and 25 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Iraq (19 July 2008 – 3 October 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: ICM-2CS, ARCOM-2, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: N/A h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: Electronic copy of the DD Form 2624, dated 28 January 2011, reflects the applicant tested positive for marijuana during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing conducted on 6 January 2011. FG Article 15, dated 25 May 2011, for wrongfully using marijuana (between on or about 8 December 2011 and 6 January 2011). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $975.00 pay (suspended), and extra duty for 15 days. U.S. Army Crime Records Center Memorandum, dated 21 June 2016, reflects they have no files pertaining to the applicant, which can be considered a “no record” response for USACIDC records pursuant to the Privacy Act and the Freedom of Information Act. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: DA Form 2807-1 (Report of Medical History), dated 23 June 2011, reflects the applicant indicated “yes” in blocks 17d.-g., and provided the explanation of the yes answers as PTSD. The healthcare provider’s comments reflect the applicant had been seeing a social worker and psychiatrist for a month, four times a month. DA Form 3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 29 June 2011, reflects the applicant had a clear and normal thought process and was mentally responsible. The applicant was diagnosed with (Axis I) Anxiety Disorder NOS (meets retention requirements). The applicant underwent screening for both PTSD and mTBI; however, tested negative on both. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, dated 17 February 2016, and DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. Paragraph 14-12c(2) terms abuse of illegal drugs as serious misconduct. It continues; however, by recognizing relevant facts may mitigate the nature of the offense. Therefore, a single drug abuse offense may be combined with one or more minor disciplinary infractions or incidents of other misconduct and processed for separation under paragraph 14-12a or 14-12b, as appropriate. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members’ discharges. “Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre-existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service.” “Conditions documented in the record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which PTSD or PTSD related conditions may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Correction Boards will also exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct.” 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of her general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant’s record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The applicant, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of her service. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that she should have been retained. The applicant contends that she was shocked that she was sexually assaulted by a CSM, but paid for it. A search of the Army criminal file indexes utilizing the applicant’s information revealed that there were no records to support the claim. Furthermore, the record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with her overall service record. The applicant contends that her trauma led to a downward spiral and that she used an illegal substance to cope, which ultimately caused her to be discharged. However, she had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that she ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant contends that she did not receive any counseling, which has caused a negative impact in her life. According to the healthcare provider’s comments reflected on DA Form 2807-1 (Report of Medical History), dated 23 June 2011, the applicant had been seeing a social worker and psychiatrist four times a month. It was also noted that her treatment consisted of talk therapy and group therapy. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 7 September 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: NA AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NA - Not applicable SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 VA - Veterans Affair ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20160007085 5